By the way, I think this thread has developed into a very interesting discussion. Thank you StreetlightX, and others who have participated, for some v...
It would be ridiculous to think that neither the future is prior to the past, nor the past is prior to the future, when the concept of "future and pas...
What's wrong with Deleuze? I find him to be one of the very few modern philosophers who actually seemed to know what he's talking about. See, he is si...
Such a difference implies a necessary underlying continuity, sameness, and this is the underlying analog principle. My argument is that this underlyin...
In this example, the psi provides the material content, while the value assigned to it, is what has changed. "Psi" is unchanged, therefore providing u...
Yes, the continuum comes to be called such to distinguish it from the digital or discrete, but this does not imply that these are properly opposed. Th...
You may be missing the force of the argument SteetlightX. "The analog", continuum, or whatever you wish to call it, is the very same as the "thing-in-...
The real issue here, I think, is the question of whether the natural (analogue) continuum has any identity whatsoever. Aristotle identified it as the ...
I don't think so. I think that the whole of myself exists today, and the whole of myself existed yesterday, and the day before. I don't think of the s...
Surely there is sense in a relation of self to self. I can relate myself of today to myself of yesterday, and my potential self of tomorrow. By establ...
Yes, but the considerable point is that this "unique existence" involves a temporal extension. So the principle which allows us to say that the thing ...
As I indicated in the other thread, there are two distinct forms of identity. Wittgenstein (intentionally I believe) creates ambiguity with his use of...
In any discussion of identity, it should be noted that there are two very distinct types of identity, sometimes referred to as qualitative and numeric...
The problem here is that without the human perspective, there is no one to interpret the meaning of these words, "matter exists". So it's really point...
That's the point then, once it's done, the act has been externalized, and you're constrained by that external fact, prior to this you are not constrai...
This is why you've been denying the distinction I've been trying to make then. Tell me, do you believe that there is a difference between casting your...
I see you haven't read that little bit which Wayfarer recently referred. If so, perhaps you wouldn't be so sure that we're starting to have a good und...
Perhaps, based merely on the quoted passage, but then you went on to criticise the basis of my categorical distinction. What you wrote was not an anal...
Hostility of Arab nations toward the U.S. did not begin in 2001. Were you alive in the late seventies during the Iranian revolution, and the hundreds ...
This is the nature of conceptualization, the more specific is explained by reference to the more general. I do not believe that this leads to an infin...
If you've convinced yourself of that, I won't bother to argue the point anymore. But now all you've done is defined logic as any type of association. ...
Here's a passage from that article on "Logic, DNA and Poetry". Although the focus is on "context", notice the last line, "...to select between words.....
Why not, if you define "qualia" as "what it's like"? Clearly, the computer, with the software must recognize what the image is like, to make the deter...
Ok, you refuse to acknowledge your contradictions. Let me explain this issue. It's quite straight forward, but metaphysically important. Your claim th...
See, here you approach the same contradiction. How can you set out a set of random thoughts without thinking? Any act of setting out thoughts is neces...
Any sot of recognition indicates the existence of what you call "what it's like" knowledge, "qualia". That's what recognition is based in, knowing wha...
As a cause of change in the wold. logic is a formal cause. But as we know, there are causes of causes, and thinking is the cause of this formal cause,...
This is false though, logical principles do not govern thinking. We choose which principles we wish to apply, and some may not be logical . You even a...
That's the ambiguity I referred to earlier. "Chance" when speaking about a future event, refers to a possibility. This could be interpreted as probabi...
Tendency and intention are two distinct things. Tendency is a leaning toward a particular action, it might be a habit or something like that. Intentio...
No, you are redefining "logic" to suit your purpose. Logic doesn't constrain our thinking, it is thinking, a particular type of thinking, reasoning. W...
I don't see any infinite regress here. Let's say that there is something within me which I call "self", and this self experiences. Why would there nee...
I have no problem with "probability", I believe it is very useful. What I have a problem with is "chance", or "randomness". Do you see the difference?...
Could someone explain to me what is wrong with the homuncular approach? People speak as if this is some big fallacy, but until the homuncular approach...
Yeah, apokrisis introduces a Logic which is actually illogical because it is supposed to exist independently of any mind, and this Logic is what struc...
Yes, I see your point, but now we're not talking about the meaning of "intelligibility", we're talking about the meaning of "the world". I don't think...
If you think that this demystifies the metaphysics of intention and purpose, you're in a dream. How does a vague explanation full of ambiguities, equi...
Your talking about "laws" now, here, and we were talking about randomness. Randomness is a failure to follow any laws. So you appear to be trying to c...
Science is a deeply metaphysical "exercise"? How so? Making an ontic commitment is just that, making an ontic commitment, it is not an exercise. Deter...
From an idealist perspective, "the world" is something created within our minds, and so it is necessarily intelligible. We exist as independent minds ...
This all depends on what type of existence you think that knowledge has, which is determined by your metaphysical perspective. Some would say that kno...
Why would you say that thinking of the present as a division between future and past involves "cutting into the flow of time"? It is not even establis...
If the government isn't going to tell you what's right and what's wrong, then who is going to tell you this, your mother? If everyone's own mother dec...
But it's not a case of what the human form can become, it's a case of what it should become. And this produces the problem of subjectivity. There are ...
Then you don't understand the point. Probability, possibility, and chance, only exist in relation to an intentional being. That is why it is necessary...
Comments